search_api_endpoints

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. However, it only says 'Full-text search across API endpoints' and does not mention that it is a read-only operation, the structure of results, or how parameters like limit and spec_id affect behavior. This is a significant gap for a tool with no output schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, concise sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource. However, it is so terse that it omits useful context, though this is more a completeness issue than a conciseness issue.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain what a full-text search returns, how results are ordered or filtered, or how the agent can use the limit and spec_id parameters effectively. This is below the minimum viable level for a no-output-schema tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 100% coverage, describing all three parameters (query, limit, spec_id) with clear semantics. The tool description adds no additional parameter context, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema already handles parameter documentation effectively.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb ('search') and resource ('API endpoints'), making its purpose evident. It distinguishes itself from sibling search tools by targeting API endpoints, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with related tools like get_api_endpoints or get_api_endpoint_detail.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus other search tools (e.g., search_semantic, search_patterns, search_temporal) or retrieval tools (e.g., get_api_endpoints). It does not mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or recommended contexts, leaving the agent to infer usage.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.